I´m all for equality, men and women having equal rights (the right to vote, education, the right to work, etc), but feminism nowadays has gone a little to far in my opinion. I met a couple of women who claimed were feminists and was shocked how they talk about men. In my opinion, they treat men very disrespectfully.

I read some discussion on the internet where some people claim society nowadays is very anti-men oriented. They say masculinity and masculine traits were considered negative and that the feminist propaganda is "emasculating" men. Is that true? What do you think about that? I don´t really think any kind of propaganda can change something that is natural. Also, I think it´s kind of ironic that masculinity is considered negative and men are supposedly condemned for being masculine, but at the same time masculine traits are encouraged in women and women are condemned for being feminine, lol. (I can confirm that). Makes no sense.

I agree with Sunny in that Feminism has become really overrated. Its unnatural, and only proves that women feel they have *something to prove*, which indicates that in some cases, some women feel they have to fight a cause. Now....I'm divided as to what constitutes feminism, and what is fair. For example - I believe that women should be paid as men are for the same kind of work. I also believe that most women are capable of doing a mans job, whether it be a physical job or upper management. That's fair (imo). However, i would not be offended (like some women are) if a man whistled at me, or opened the door for me to go through first. (First example amuses me, second is just polite). Oh and as for women staying at home, while the man goes to work...well if that works better for you, then fine. That also applies if the man stays home too, btw.

Molly wrote:I agree with Sunny in that Feminism has become really overrated. Its unnatural, and only proves that women feel they have *something to prove*, which indicates that in some cases, some women feel they have to fight a cause. Now....I'm divided as to what constitutes feminism, and what is fair. For example - I believe that women should be paid as men are for the same kind of work. I also believe that most women are capable of doing a mans job, whether it be a physical job or upper management. That's fair (imo). However, i would not be offended (like some women are) if a man whistled at me, or opened the door for me to go through first. (First example amuses me, second is just polite).

I second everything here; I don't think a bit of femininity is a bad thing, if anything it should be encouraged. However there is a limit, as Molly said here I don't think people should be paid differently for doing what essentially amounts to be the same job, or management within a company.

I think this whole 'femininity is wrong' is just a trend, a craze that will eventually die down in favour of another new 'hot-topic' for people to complain about, in honesty.

Feminism.. don't get me started. Luckily everything has already been said in this topic.

The only thing I disagree on is the idea of most women being able to do a typical man's job. It ain't gonna happen. A typical manly job can be found in the industrial sector. It's physically very demanding and hiring a woman to function, for example, as a roughneck or a coal miner would get the woman fired within a couple of hours.

Over here in the UK, we have women railway workers who do physical jobs day in and day out. Women builders who climb scaffolding with big lumps of wood. Also, a lot of women have broken through the "Glass Ceiling" of upper management, and are chairwomen of their own successful companies. Just sayin'

I am egalitarian though, in ideal. Everything should be individually merit-based. I don't understand why it's such a difficult concept for many people. Forget about gender, race, or anything else people tend to ascribe at birth. None of those things determine anything about a person in terms of potential skill or ability. People should be evaluated (if they must be evaluated) by what they have proven to be, not what society labels them as.

Molly wrote:Over here in the UK, we have women railway workers who do physical jobs day in and day out. Women builders who climb scaffolding with big lumps of wood. Also, a lot of women have broken through the "Glass Ceiling" of upper management, and are chairwomen of their own successful companies. Just sayin'

Ofcourse there are masculine females who are physically able to do those jobs. The same way there are feminine men being make up artists and such. However the number of women in the UK working as engineers is 6%... or close to nothing. In the entire industrial sector women are vastly underrepresented.

The problem with feminists is they want all the equal rights, whether it's social-political equality or equality under law. However, they don't want to do the hard, physical labour (= wealth creation) and demand all kinds of other social nonsense. They want to eat their cake and have it.

I agree on the Glass Ceiling theory though, women broke through. It's a very good thing. However, it's still a man's world whether you like it or not and it's hard for a woman to be fully taken seriously in the upper levels of management. If this situation will ever change only time can tell.

I agree on the Glass Ceiling theory though, women broke through. It's a very good thing. However, it's still a man's world whether you like it or not and it's hard for a woman to be fully taken seriously in the upper levels of management. If this situation will ever change only time can tell.

Oh I don't know, some women certainly know how to manage their team lol!

Feminsim: The advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

I fail to see how this is a bad thing.

I proudly consider myself a Feminist. Discrimination and sexism are both still alive in Western society. Feminism promotes the idea that both genders should be treated equally under the law. This isn't a radical position to take.

One doesn't need to be feminine to be a Feminist, nor do they need to deny that there are certain inherent differences between the genders. Promoting femininity and/or slandering masculinity and men in general is not one of the goals of Feminism. I don't deny that a group of people who believe in such things exist; however, I would adamantly argue that those people are not Feminists, for they do not promote equality.

However, they don't want to do the hard, physical labour (= wealth creation) and demand all kinds of other social nonsense.

Feminism today has nothing to do with a search for equality and resembles much more a campaign to promote female privilege and female elitism. Feminism is all about tilting the playfield and throwing any resemblance of fairness out of the window in order to create equal outcomes.

Such as you've said yourself, there are women who aren't complete man-haters and simply go along for the ride. But what they will do is participate in a five kilometer run for woman's cancer research. The funding for men's prostate cancer research is 100 times lower. It'd never pop up in these women's heads to run for male prostate cancer. It's not an issue to feminists, as the issue does not concern women.

Ofcourse this is a mere example. The point is, it doesn't matter what the score is between men and women. Feminists always want more for women.

I was seriously contemplating on whether I should put that up as an example to make my final point. I did. It's not the most tasteful (but true) example, but hey, feminism isn't all that tasteful either once you get to know the big picture.

Why do you think there's a breast cancer awareness month alongside with a breast cancer charity run? If feminists were consistant in their vision and mission they'd insist on a 'general cancer' awareness month for the sake of 'equality'. Alas, they don't.

Molly wrote:Surely this reasoning would infer that the playing field is unequal if women have to tilt it to create equal outcomes? ie its a mans world.

When you look at the 100 meter dash at the Olympics and see that the finalists are all black men, what does this mean? Well, it simply means black men are better suited to run this 100 meter dash. If you'd like to see more white males running the 100 meter dash final the results must be fixed. That's what my comment was all about.

Another example: 59% of women in the UK are university entrants. How do feminists respond? Do they demand equality and insist on an increase in male numbers? They don't. Instead, they demand more help for women in education. It doesn't really matter what these numbers are. Whether it's 70 or 80 percent, feminists will campaign for more universities to be build so the 'oppresive patriarch' will not deny any woman access to universities. Feminism is not about equality and has never been.

As a UK citizen I can confidently suggest that this is a smoke screen to free up more spaces in our full to bursting prison system. You will find that the majority of women are in prison for *soft* crimes, like shoplifting, non-payment of fines or taxes, breach of the peace, and some assault/manslaughter cases. The majority of men are in prison for rape, murder and pedophilia related crimes. This means they NEED to be kept off our streets.

Thus making it a *feminist issue* is moot, since the final decision will, inevitably, be made by a man. The article was dated 2011. This is 2013. There has been no change to the proposal.

Molly wrote:As a UK citizen I can confidently suggest that this is a smoke screen to free up more spaces in our full to bursting prison system. You will find that the majority of women are in prison for *soft* crimes, like shoplifting, non-payment of fines or taxes, breach of the peace, and some assault/manslaughter cases. The majority of men are in prison for rape, murder and pedophilia related crimes. This means they NEED to be kept off our streets.

Thus making it a *feminist issue* is moot, since the final decision will, inevitably, be made by a man. The article was dated 2011. This is 2013. There has been no change to the proposal.

You can't really defend this idea of women not having to go to prison for whatever crime they committed. That's probably why there has been no change to the proposal.

Dutchman wrote:You can't really defend this idea of women not having to go to prison for whatever crime they committed. That's probably why there has been no change to the proposal.

I'm sorry? Please point out exactly where I said this?

Men's crimes require longer sentencing and for this, they require to be kept off the streets, therefore taking up more room. Women's crimes may need sentencing, but there lie opportunities whereby part of the sentence could be undertaken outwith the the bars of cell. Thereby freeing up room.

I stopped listening after the jury example. The talk show example concerned C-listers being insensitive morons. Just because a bunch of fans of the hosts laughed does not mean that they are representative of those who support Feminism, nor does it mean that the women in the audience were Feminists. As for the second example, that doesn't even remotely come close to proving his point. I could just as easily cite an example of an episode I saw in which a wife got life in prison for plotting to kill her husband through a poisoned drink; however, the man who she was having an affair with only got twenty years. It's still fallacious to assume either example actually demonstrates either point. Regardless of gender, injustice happens all the time in the legal system.

Women face more sexism in general (unequal pay, comparatively harder to achieve high positions) in society due to general attitudes/behaviors that exist. That's why there's more of an emphasis on misogyny than misandry in society. It's not right that one receives more attention than the other, but there's no denying that one *is* more prevalent than the other.

awareness month alongside with a breast cancer charity run? If feminists were consistant in their vision and mission they'd insist on a 'general cancer' awareness month for the sake of 'equality'. Alas, they don't.

There is a Prostate Awareness Month. I'd agree that a general one would be nice, but these things generally intended to raise funds for a specific cause.

I define feminism as being the pursuit of equal rights and opportunities for women, and, going by that definition, I'm a feminist. To me, anything that goes beyond the pursuit of equal rights is no longer feminism, but rather something along the lines of "female supremacy," and I also don't think anyone going beyond seeking equal rights should be calling themselves a feminist, but they probably will anyways, and this is where the confusion comes from.

"By all means let's be open minded, but not so open minded that our brains fall out."

Feminism is a good credo. One should not do the converse of now's situation becasue the scenario would worsen.As for civil rights after slavery, black slaves shall not treat white as white people did treat them.We should walk toward our goals, toward the kind of society we persue.

Feminism is over rated, why stop there! lets add a few more ism's to the nut house how about Child-ism, black-ism, yellow-ism, India -ism and so on. The human race has lost its mind! Oh! and just throw in the language craziness as well! where there is no more male, he , she, her, female, father, mother and on it goes. This is all done on purpose by the few high rocky that control the world to bring us all under their control ready for the One World Order.